Its somewhat-historically accurate plot has never really made sense to me. The controls aren’t the easiest to master, and the hack-and-slash combat system starts to get boring after a few hours.

Has Assassin’s Creed III fixed any of these issues? Kind of. But the big question is, does any of this make it a bad game?

With Assassin’s Creed III, I expected to be blown away. The trailers, the naval combat, even the short periods of time I spent with the game at preview events; all of this indicated that Assassin’s Creed III would probably be one of the best titles of the year. I was even more excited for Assassin’s Creed III than Halo 4, for some reason.

The game’s engine is stellar and, at times, Assassin’s Creed III is one of the best looking games on this generation of consoles. However, it suffers from slow down, especially when there are multiple enemies on screen at once. It also has frame rate issues. Elements of the environments and characters tend to pop in and out in the distance. I also at times wonder if the fog that’s present throughout much of the game’s world is more than just a cool-looking graphical feature, and actually needs to be in the game in order to keep it running smoothly (sort of like Silent Hill on the PSone).

Character models look great, but it’s easy to notice the occasional graphical anomaly or blurry texture and this ruins the title’s immersion. For instance, during cut scenes, occasionally character’s hair will flow in odd directions, or parts of their clothing are low resolution. These issues don’t occur very often though.

Still, Assassin’s Creed III is a beautiful game and it’s difficult to fault Ubisoft for these missteps when the game obviously pushes this generation of consoles to their limit. Assassin’s Creed III is a perfect example of why we need successors to the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360: The aging consoles are holding innovative developers like Ubisoft back.

Assassin’s Creed III takes place during the American Revolution (1753-1783) and is a direct sequel to 2009’s Assassin’s Creed II. It follows the journey of Connor Kenway, a half Mohawk, half English protagonist who swears allegiance to neither the British nor the American Revolutionaries. He works towards his own goals and, without giving too much of the game’s plot away, this involves revenge and the protection of his Mohawk village. The game’s setting is as unique as is its main character, resulting in interesting missions and unique gameplay opportunities.

While the plot line is unique, it falls apart about halfway through the game. I admire Ubisoft’s ambition and what they are trying to accomplish with Assassin’s Creed III’s story but it boils down to a complicated convoluted mess in the end, despite some successes.

Of course, there’s also the whole silly Templars Vs. Assassin war that links back to the game’s true main character, Desmond, and a group of other scientists. I try to ignore this part of the game though because I’ve always thought that this back story is stupid. I don’t understand why the franchise just can’t take place during whatever era the video game developers have chosen, and not some sort of modern video game memory machine (called the animus in the series), but this is another discussion all together.

Many of Assassin’s Creed III’s earlier missions are horribly frustrating and force stealth on the player, a mechanic that I’ve always disliked. If you’re discovered, the mission is over, resulting in a substantial amount of frustration due to wasted time. Eventually the game opens up, but for the first 4-6 hours, freedom is limited. Later on, players are given the option to approach missions in less stealthy ways and I wish this was the case for earlier segments, as well.

Some of the title’s later missions, like the Battle of Bunker Hill and a few other larger scale fights, live up to what Ubisoft has shown in videos and trailers and are truly captivating. Unfortunately though, much of the game is still spent completing menial tasks and following other characters around while they explain the game’s intricate plot line.

While entertaining, this makes Assassin’s Creed III’s pacing feel jarring. One minute you’re bounding over roof tops, stabbing enemies in every direction, and the next you’re walking around a town while William Johnson explains the intricacies of the revolutionaries’ plight to Connor.

Assassin’s Creed III’s combat system is simplified in many ways but I still don’t find it very entertaining. The rope dart, bow and a few other unique weapons that I won’t spoil in this review, do spice things up a little bit. I also found some enemies way too difficult to take down because breaking their defence and getting an attack in simply took too long.

The fact that hiding in bushes causes enemies to no longer be able to see me seems a little strange (especially when Connor is actually still visible). Once you’re discovered, I found it difficult to escape the wrath of my perusers; hiding spots are harder to come by in Assassin’s Creed III, resulting in frustrating situations. It’s also difficult to predict whether guards are going to see your or not and performing the same sneaky manoeuvre twice, might not yield the same results.

Also at times, the game’s automatic save points are too far apart, forcing a few missions to be replayed countless times. Occasionally, especially when sneaking around, the free running climbing mechanic becomes very frustrating. A bunch of times, I accidentally revealed Connor’s location because he climbed up a wall or bounded over a platform that I didn’t want him to. A button that turns off free running would have been a great addition to the series.

Features like a deep hunting system, impressive naval combat and the game’s homestead upgrade system are a welcome addition to the series and provide an extra level of depth for gamers looking to to spend more time in Assassin’s Creed III’s massive frontier territory.

The frontier just might be one of the series’ best features.

Ubisoft has created one of the most believable open worlds in recent memory (yes, even better than Skyrim’s). Trees and wildlife look spectacular and so does Connor as he bounds over branches and cliffs. I actually found running through the country side, hunting and completing side missions way more fun than toiling through Assassin’s Creed III’s main campaign.

Assassin’s Creed III also includes a multiplayer mode that features an interesting mode called domination. Domination works very similarly to king of the hill in other games and players have to hold certain areas of a map for specific lengths of time. It also features an interesting cooperative multiplayer mode called wolf pack. In wolf pack, players work together to take down enemies in a specific period of time. While not exactly my kind of multiplayer game, Assassin’s Creed III features the most robust multiplayer mode in the series so far.

Taking out enemies in Assassin’s Creed III is still extremely impressive (and filled with gore). Handout/Ubisoft

Despite all the negative aspects I’ve pointed out over the course of this review, Assassin’s Creed III really isn’t a bad game at all. It’s a solid video game and the best Assassin’s Creed title yet. Even with its technical issues, graphically, it’s one of the most impressive titles of this generation, rivaling Halo 4 for this year’s best looking game.

I expected more though and maybe with a few more months of polish, Assassin’s Creed III could have completely delivered on the massive hype that surrounded it. It almost feels like Ubisoft became a victim of their own ambition with Assassin’s Creed III.

In the end, Assassin’s Creed III is a great game but if you didn’t like Assassin’s Creed titles before, III isn’t going to change your mind.

Assassin’s Creed III was released on October 30th for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. It is set to come out on the Wii U on November 18th. For this review, I played the PlayStation 3 version of Assassin’s Creed III